In re Limestone Cemetery

24 Pa. D. & C.2d 281, 1960 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 42
CourtWarren County Court of Quarter Sessions
DecidedAugust 1, 1960
Docketno. 46
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 24 Pa. D. & C.2d 281 (In re Limestone Cemetery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Warren County Court of Quarter Sessions primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Limestone Cemetery, 24 Pa. D. & C.2d 281, 1960 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 42 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1960).

Opinion

Flick, P. J.,

Before the court is a petition signed by the Limestone Cemetery Association by its president and secretary and by 27 residents of Limestone Township, Warren County, averring that the public cemetery in said township, owned and operated by Limestone Cemetery Association since 1886, is being neglected because said association, a nonprofit corporation chartered in 1885, has insufficient funds for proper care of said cemetery. Petitioners pray the court to direct that title to the cemetery be transferred to the Supervisors of Limestone Township, and said cemetery be cared for by the supervisors pursuant to article VII of The Second Class Township Code, as amended.

History

The petition was filed July 16, 1958. It is acknowledged by Edmond B. Bimber, who, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is president of Limestone Cemetery Association, one of petitioners, and that the facts set forth in the petition are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. The president’s signature is attested by Ray Brownell, as secretary of the corporation, who also swore to the facts to be true and correct, and that the signers of the petition are all residents of Limestone Township, Warren County. On August 14, 1958, a hearing was held on the petition in open court, at which petitioners were represented by counsel and the Supervisors of Limestone Township were also represented by counsel.

At the hearing the following exhibits were put in evidence by petitioners: The petition, to which no answer was filed; application for charter for Limestone Cemetery Association, as a nonprofit corpora[283]*283tion under the Act of April 29, 1874; proof of publication of notice that application will be made; proposed articles of incorporation and order of court dated September 7, 1885, approving the charter and bringing the Limestone Cemetery Association into being as a nonprofit corporation for the purpose of maintaining a public eemetéry in Limestone Township, upon recording of the charter and order of court. As appears by notation thereon, these were recorded September 14, 1885, in the Recorder’s Office of Warren County in charter book no. 1 at page 507. Also in evidence are a copy of the bylaws of the corporation, a deed to the corporation from Katharine McKean et al., dated May 27, 1886, and recorded in Warren County Deed Book, 80, page 634 on March 28, 1896, conveying “about one acre and 153 perches of land”; an unsigned copy of a right of way from the corporation to the Tide-Water Pipe Co., dated September 4, 1908, “across a portion of the Cemetery Company’s land,” and a plat, labeled “Plan — Limestone Cemetery Association — Lots.” showing 57 numbered lots. Testimony on behalf of petitioners was given by Ray Brownell, secretary of the corporation, who has held that position about three years. Two witnesses were called on behalf of the Supervisors of Limestone Township. These were Fred Yeager, a supervisor for eight years and president of the board, and Oakley Lynch, a supervisor for 20 years. It must be noted that these two gentlemen, and the third member of the Board of Supervisors of Limestone Township as well, signed the petition. This was done in their individual capacities as residents of Limestone Township. Officially, as the Township Board of Supervisors, they took no action in regard to the matter. In fact, it is doubtful that they support the petition, even as individual citizens, for Fred Yeager, when asked why he had signed the petition as an individual, replied: [284]*284“Well, just because the other two did, I guess.” Record, page 19.

The situation disclosed by the record is not unique. Many small nonprofit cemeteries throughout the country present a more or less neglected appearance, and the explaination is usually the same; sufficient funds have not been set aside for perpetual care. Some small cemeteries relied on gifts for maintenance, which were authorized for nonprofit cemeteries by the Act of April 29, 1874, P. L. 73, and are now authorized by the Act of August 10, 1951, P. L. 1199. Some relied on actual maintenance work performed by the lot owners or relatives of the interred. Beginning with the Act of March 11, 1909, companies such as Limestone Cemetery Association have been required to set aside a sum equal to at least one tenth of the gross amount received from the sale of lots for perpetual care and preservation of the grounds. This they are now required to do by the Nonprofit Corporation Law of May 5, 1933, P. L. 289. The minimum requirement is still only 10 percent. It should certainly be increased. The evidence does not show whether the Limestone Cemetery Association sold any lots after 1909, but, if this was done, the law was not complied with for the association has no funds acquired from the sale of lots. It does have $1,100 “donated from time to time by the people ... to keep for future maintenance.” This fund is held in trust by the Warren National Bank and earns about $25 a. year which is all the money available for maintenance of the cemetery.

Authority to spend township funds for the maintenance of cemeteries begins with the Act of May 24, 1917, P. L. 292, which authorized the supervisors, on petition of 25 citizens residing, within five miles of a cemetery neglected so as to become a nuisance, to spend $15 when ordered by the court to cut brush, [285]*285grass, briars and weeds in August of each year. The Act of May 10, 1923, P. L. 198, increased the authorized expenditure to not more than $30 for any one cemetery, provided that the supervisors could be ordered to cut the brush, etc., twice a year, before May 30th and on August 15th. The Second Class Township Code of May 1, 1933, P. L. 103, continued the $30' expenditure. It was increased to $60 in 1949 and to $.100 in 1953. This sum is continued as the limit for township funds which the court may order the supervisors to spend for maintenance of neglected cemeteries, by the amendment of July 5, 1957, P. L. 529, 53 PS §65728. This is the act under which the petition was filed in this case and will be quoted in full later on in this opinion.

If the managers or members of the cemetery association, incorporated or unincorporated, have relied on the descendants and relatives of those buried in the cemetery to see that the graves are not neglected, with the passing of time such relatives or descendants may die or move away from the community. This seems to be the case with the Limestone Cemetery Association. No moneys from the sale of lots have been set aside for perpetual care, and the only money available is the $25 annual income from the donated maintenance fund.

The court could find no recorded case dealing with this situation. It may be that the only good solutions must be practical solutions and not those afforded by the law. However that may be, the court must try to arrive at a reasonable solution for the issue raised by the petition, a solution authorized by law. The matter has been given much study and is now ready for such solution as the court can find.

Discussion

One of the safeguards for the long-suffering taxpayers of our country is the hard and fast rule that [286]*286public funds may not be expended without statutory authority, express or necessarily implied. Authority for spending township funds for the upkeep of the cemetery owned by Limestone Cemetery Association is found in the 1957 amendment to The Second Class Township Code of July 5, 1957, P. L. 529, which reads as follows:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gakin v. City of Rapid City
2005 SD 68 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 Pa. D. & C.2d 281, 1960 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-limestone-cemetery-paqtrsesswarren-1960.